www.reconciliationtalk.com

Islamophobia: troubling developments and the Luton connection.

The past few days have seen some worrying developments as far as I am concerned in community relations in our nation. Islamophobia is nothing new as Muslims will tell you. Yet a more active, committed and agressive Islamophobia seems to be emerging that should cause us all to think and work and especially pray harder than ever.

Regular readers of this blog will know that this is the subject that has remained at the forefront of my writing this past four months.  I reviewed the state of things at the three month stage a month ago (Luton: Three Months in the News and an election over. What now? ) and have continued to post on issues directly related to Luton as well as Muslim-Christian / secular western society issues.  For the full list of posts see Seeking Peace in Luton - and Multicultural UK

We are used to the constant outpouring of stories that point the finger at the Muslim community from the Daily Mail, the Express and sometimes - albeit in a more sophisticated way - the Telegraph. This past few days they have included a lot on Burqa's and veils (I posted  A British city's opinions on the burkha   and  OK, lets talk about the veil, but accurately and without bigotry. ), and today a story in the Express titled Police give Muslims in cells compasses to pray to Mecca. (There is an amusing riposte in Islamophobia watch. )

More worrying has been a story of a young 11 year old boy converting to Islam - led along by controversial al-Muhajiroun leader Anjem Choudary.  The shocking picture of a white boy aged 11 being 'converted' to Islam by radical preacher. There is a video on YouTube here.  I am tempted to think this may be a direct statement by Choudary that he does not consider himself bound by the new guidelines for ethical witness that I have reported here:  Ethical Witness - Muslims and Christians get to the heart of things. and Ethical Guidelines for Christian and Muslim Witness in Britain.

However we seem to be moving from a contempt by many towards the Muslim community to a more committed opposition to them.

First the Sunday Times reported  this at the weekend:   Bomb seizures spark far-right terror plot fear.  While the police were only labelling them far right in origin, with 32 arrested so far, they did report that in a recent case plans of mosques were found. Later overseas papers have connected these facts.  This of course builds on two incidents of fire bombing of mosques in the past two months. Mosque petrol bombed twice. of a mosque in Greewich, London, and in early May the fire bombing of a mosque here in Luton:  May 5th - Sick: Mosque set on fire in Luton   and May 7th -  Leaders of all faiths in Luton condemn Mosque fire. 

Second,yesterday we had a much stronger set of reports. Police fear far-right terror attack in the Guardian (and Far-Right extremists 'are plotting spectacular terrorist attack in UK', police warn in the Daily Mail) develop the story in Sunday papers about police concerns at far right plans to stir up community tension through a large bomb blast. The Guardian:

Commander Shaun Sawyer told a meeting of British Muslims concerned about the danger to their communities that police were responding to the growing threat. Sawyer said of the far right: "I fear that they will have a spectacular... they will carry out an attack that will lead to a loss of life or injury to a community somewhere. They're not choosy about which community." He said the aim would be to cause a "breakdown in community cohesion".

Luton, which has been at the centre of this growing agressive islamophobia, inevitably comes into focus.  The image in the Mail is of a Luton protestor on May 24th. Luton's Lionheart, Paul Ray, thinks that means they are being suspected. He wrote about that yesterday. (I do not generally link to his posts or other that spread a message of hate.)  I suspect it is that is unlikely that Ray or his local buddies are involved. They are too obvious, and I suspect Ray is not  ideologically committed to such extremes of violence. 

I will review recent protest developments in Luton and around the nation in a later post.

Rick Warren addresses N American Muslims

Despite heavy criticism, yesterday US Pastor Rick Warren addressed the annual conference of the Islamic Society of N America.  Warren prayed for President Obama at the inauguration back in January and was apparently invited to ISNA then.

For something that caused controversy in conservative blogs, the main press coverage was thin. Associated Press had Megachurch pastor Rick Warren addresses US Muslims and in the Washington Times:  Rick Warren envisions Coalition of Faith  . The AP reports him as saying:

Warren acknowledged the controversy during his 20-minute speech.

"It's easier to be an extremist of any kind because then you only have one group of people mad at you," he said. "But if you actually try to build relationships — like invite an evangelical pastor to your gathering — you'll get criticized for it. So will I."

In his speech, Warren also urged Muslims and Christians to speak out against stereotyping of any group and to respect each other even while disagreeing. Addressing Muslims who "have been in America for many generations now," he urged them to help "the newcomers learn what it means to be American."

and the Washington Times:

"I am not interested in interfaith dialogue but interfaith projects," said the pastor of the 24,000-member Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, Calif., who is widely known for his bestseller "The Purpose-Driven Life."

"Talk is cheap ... but love is something we do together," he added. "As the two largest faiths on this planet - more than 1 billion Muslims and 2 billion Christians - as Muslims and Christians, we must believe in this. As more than half the world, we must do something to model what it is to live in peace, to live in harmony."

Warren spoke Saturday evening. At the time of writing only Friday's webcasts were available. I assume it will be posted and also that the transcript will be available, and will post them when it is.  Also speaking on Saturday at a different session were Miroslav Volf (Yale Centre for Faith and Culture )and Chris Sieple ( Institute for Global Engagement ) on the Common Word Process.

Many Conservative Christian blogs were dismissive. Joel Belz of World Magazine was holding his judgement:  Meeting with Muslims .

To critics of Warren, who think it’s wrong on the face of the matter for him to speak at an event sponsored by Muslims, I say: Wait until you hear what Warren says.

I don’t say that with any kind of inside information. I say it based on the fact that in the Bible, proponents of the gospel seem never to have hesitated to go anywhere with their proclamation. I appreciate Rick Warren’s boldness, and I pray for his faithfulness.

Here’s the test: If Warren shows up at the Muslim gathering and soft-pedals the truth, and talks only about how important it is for us to “get along,” then evangelicals should hold him to account. But if he is as typically forthright as he usually is, we should thank God for the opening and pray that the Lord will prosper Warren’s words.

In the light of that, words that the Washington Times reported might suggest that Warren will not meet Belz's approval:

Although he is an evangelical pastor, Mr. Warren was sparse in his mentions of Jesus and God. Muslims believe Jesus was a prophet but not God incarnate.

"My deepest faith is in Jesus Christ," the preacher said at one point. "I am committed not only to the good news but the common good. Scripture says 'love your neighbor as yourself.' I am commanded to respect everybody."

 

But I am certainly satisfied.

OK, lets talk about the veil, but accurately and without bigotry.

The hijab debate: 'I don't want to be judged on my looks' in the Independent last weekend gave ten womens reasons why they veiled to one extent or another. We need to listen to them, and the men of the community, and do them the decency of hearing what they have to say. The debate that has been going on is filled with bigotry and ignorance.

For a glimpse of why the "burqa debate" is so offensive to Muslims, have a look at the comments section of Berks and Burqas  at Harry's Place, a low key politics blog that according to Islamophobia watch is renowned for its negativity to Muslims.  Harry's Place debates the 'burka ban'  summarises a few of the comments. I choose three:

"... it must be intended to convey a message. For me, that message is that the wearer and her family support terrorism and those forces against which our soldiers are fighting, and so are going to get no sympathy from me."

"The Burqua is more a political statement when worn in the West; it should be reviled for what it symbolises and critiqued and stigmatised as the abomination that it is. It's every bit as bad as a swastika armband and worse than a BNP badge."

"We are fighting a war against the Taliban.... These people are killing our soldiers and vice versa. So wearing Taliban uniform is not just like going around wearing swastikas, but like going round wearing swastikas in 1940."

This is simply ignorant bigotry, but the arguments of some of the tabloids is not far away - albeit dressed up in less offensive language.

For an intelligent conversation it also helps to know the terminology. The BBC have a nice little graphic site on the different types of veil.   There is also good articles (5 pages to each) on the two most obvious types, the  Hijab  and the Niqab. (I realise the BBC's presentation of the case will not necessarily be satisfactory for some Muslims, but I hope you understand my motivation is to produce a sensible debate.)

Once we get past these two barriers, we will need to address some of our kneejerk reactions, and our own values. I like to see and look into peoples eyes, but I must be prepared to listen to why that may not be a valid argument. And why some women may want to be covered.

For a nation that supposedly values freedom there are a lot of people who are not prepared to allow others people's freedom

A British city's opinions on the burkha

As Sarkozy talks up a ban on the Burkha, the discussion heats up here.

In the Express: A British city's opinions on the burkha. looks at opinions in Leeds.   Also:  Ban the Burkha here in Britain.

and the latest in a  series of rants in the Mail:  Why I, as a British Muslim woman, want the burkha banned from our streets

The Muslim Council of Britain has responded to these issues here by saying they are whipping up Zenophobia. They are clearly on the Obama bandwagon:

.... the MCB echoes the US President Barack Obama's caution that 'it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practising religion as they see fit - for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear. We cannot disguise hostility towards any religion behind the pretence of liberalism.'

And yet the Times suggests its politicking by Sarkozy. Britain could never debate the burka like France | Agnès Poirier - Times Online.

I agree entirely with President Obama. Its back to freedom of choice and freedom of speech again, which we value so highly until we find it personally offensive, challenging, whatever. And then we become as intolerant as the next person.

Update:   Islamophobia Watch has a response to the campaign that is emerging in the Mail and Express: How to Ban the Veil

Answer: find some co-operative Muslims who will agree with you, and promote their views as representative of the community. That way you neatly deflect accusations of racism.

There are many voices to hear in this discussion. But as I wrote in the previous post ( Expenses leak -- "for the public good". mmm?? ) on a  different issue, "... do we really trust the press as the guardians of our morality?  I know I don't."  Or perhaps we should rephrase it here, "Do we really want the press to be the arbiters of justice and freedom in our society?" My answer remains the same.

Expenses leak -- "for the public good". mmm??

A few questions occur to me here.

BBC NEWS | Politics | MP expenses leak 'not for money'.

A middleman who helped pass on details of MPs' expenses to the Daily Telegraph has said it was done for the public good and not to make money.

Yes, it was right the situation be confronted.

But I wonder if the loss of confidence in MP's, and thus of those in public office, and ultimately of authority, is of as much ultimately more worrying that the fiddling the books. The timing of the leak, before an election, allowed the minority parties a strong voice. It could have been worse, but the gains by UKIP was significant and they have a definite agenda.

So what was the political agenda of the leak? 

And do we really trust the press as the guardians of our morality?  I know I don't.
 

Ethical Guidelines for Christian and Muslim Witness in Britain

The guidelines have been released and are here:

Ethical Guidelines for Christian and Muslim Witness in Britain

I wrote about this last night.   Ethical Witness - Muslims and Christians get to the heart of things.

The document begins:

As members of the Christian Muslim Forum we are deeply committed to our own faiths
(Christianity and Islam) and wish to bear faithful witness to them. As Christians and Muslims
we are committed to working together for the common good. We recognise that both
communities actively invite others to share their faith and acknowledge that all faiths have
the same right to share their faith with others.

What follows is just good common sense in being good neighbours, and yet fully Christian and with no compromise. Read more

Ethical Witness - Muslims and Christians get to the heart of things.

Richard Sudworth at Distinctly Welcoming just posted this very encouraging news:  Stop Press - Muslims and Christians agree that evangelism and conversion are ok.

The full details are out tomorrow, but the agreement was worked on by the Muslim Christian Forum: Ethical Witness. There is more here:

Youth Specialist on the Forum, Dr Andrew Smith, will be one of the key speakers at the launch. He has been working for the evangelical organisation Scripture Union in inner city Birmingham for the past 14 years and has been active in promoting his own faith whilst at the same time seeking to listen to and understand his Muslim neighbours.

“Speaking with local Muslims and sharing my faith has been fascinating, stimulating, even fun, but at times it has become competitive, aggressive and has left a nasty taste in my mouth. I was left feeling frustrated and defensive and with no wish to do it again! Talking to others I realised that this was a common experience, so the idea of a set of principles that would help both faiths avoid this, seemed to me an obvious way forward”

Speaking alongside Dr Smith will be Shaykh Ibrahim Mogra, Interfaith spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain. He recognises that this is a controversial and sensitive area.

“Islam and Christianity are two world religions that are missionary- and therefore are ever vying with each other for converts. But we should be able to speak of our faith honestly and with conviction, without demeaning or ridiculing others. There is no place for coercion or manipulation and when a person does convert from either faith that decision should be respected. It is our hope that these ethical guidelines will be adopted by many Christian and Muslim organisations.”

This has to be exceptionally good news. Lets wait for what is said later.

Al-Muhajiroun, their aliases, Luton and London

Al-Muhajiroun were not out in Bury Park yesterday. 

On the surface thats good news. It means that on two of the last four Fridays they have been absent from the pitch they have occupied regularly for several years. Could something be changing? And if so for the better or is this more of a challenge?

Until recently one knew exactly where you would you would find "al-Muhajiroun" (or whatever alias they were using) in Luton several days of the week. On a Tuesday it was outside the Sixth Form College, Friday's after Jumma prayer they were at a table midway along Dunstable Road in Bury Park, and on Saturday in the town centre by Don MIllers bakery on George Street. On occasions when Muslims gathered to do things with people of other faiths they were reliably around as well - the annual Faith walk organised by my colleagues in the Council of Faiths , the Holocaust memorial event each January, etc.  And then of course there was their infamous appearance on March 10th this year at the Homecoming Parade of the Royal Anglian Regiment. Its all conveniently summarised here in the recent Sunday Times article - Fear and Hatred on the Streets of Luton - page 2of 4. (There a little bit of me that resents quoting a journalist who has just hijacked "our" inglorious history for his own spurious story - but its a convenient summary and easier than turning up a string of dead links.)

Nowadays its not so simple. Things have become a bit harder for these extremists as some of the local Muslim population have begun to make it clear that they are not happy to be continually tarred with that brush. Fridays in Bury Park are now contested since a large group led from the Islamic Centre have taken it upon themselves to challenge their activity in the town: the Mail reported this,  Extremists behind anti-war protest driven off the streets by moderate Muslims and then the Independent,  Luton fights back against right-wing extremists. Al-Muhajoroun have not ventured into the town centre for a while, and Tuesday's at the college are apparently less regular.

The Islamic Centre are on the case. Last Saturday they organised a meeting, "Luton Against Extremism"  to hear from councillors and others. including myself.  (There is a copy of the Publicity here - scroll down to just before half way down the page)  The way forward is unclear, at least to me. First it needs to be clear that are dealing with two very different forms of extremism here, and what will effectively deal with one is unlikely to be of help in dealing with the other.  It is true that in dealing with one it helps to disarm the other. And I am convinced that by seeking to strengthen our relationship as peace-loving people, we deny the extremes their greatest coup, that is polarising us.

Anyway, what of al-Muhajiroun? We have been hearing in the media that they are seeking to take advantage of all the publicity they have had recently and re-launch themselves under the old name:
Al Muhajiroun's return presents test for terror laws.  It seems that the group's leader at the time Omar Bakri dissolved it before it could be banned and while its succssors were banned no one thought that they would return to the name again so it was never banned. The groups leader in the UK, Anjem Choudary  said to the Independent:

"It is a challenge to both the Government and the media to make them understand that Al Muhajiroun was never illegal in the first place. We have been demonised but there is no proof that any of our members have done anything illegal or military."

The re-launch was scheduled in a debate on Wednesday with Douglas Murray of the Centre for Social Cohesion and Anjem Choudary of al-Muhajiroun at the Conway Hall, famous as a centre of secularism. The meeting, planned somewhat covertly, broke up in chaos over the refusal of the hall owners and Murray to allow segregation of the men and women. The story is here in the Independent:  Islamist group has to abandon relaunch debate.

The debate is described on Islam for the UK site:  THE GREAT DEBATE :: SHARI'AH LAW VS BRITISH LAW  which is clearly pro-Choudary.

Douglas Murray states his own position and why he believes  Why we must debate the extremists on U:TV.  He writes:

You can't get much more egregiously wrong and wicked than the views expressed by al-Muhajiroun. But they are currently operating in what I hope will be a very brief legal air-pocket. As with the BNP, while they are legal and are being given a platform by independent organisations, they cannot go unchallenged. ...

... Some people will say that al-Muhajiroun should not be given the oxygen of publicity. Yesterday showed why bringing them out in the open and challenging their ideas is necessary. It reminds the government, the press and British citizens of the true nature of these fundamentalist thugs who are not just going to disappear. Not since Oswald Mosley's British Union of Fascists (BUF) have we seen intimidation like this on the streets of London. Like the BUF, they will resort to violence the moment their fascist views are challenged. Every piece of publicity al-Muhajiroun gain is additional ammunition to encourage the government to shut down a group whose members have regularly exceeded our incitement laws and even involved themselves in acts of terror.

The Freethinker ('The voice of atheism since 1881') reports: ‘We’re here to bring Brits the beauty of Islam,’ says frothing fanatic.  There is no question what they think:

DERANGED  koranimal Anjem Choudary and a bunch of his rug-butting goons were given the bum’s rush at the Conway Hall in London last night after their abortive attempt to publicly relaunch the wacky Islamist group Al-Muhajiroun.

The view of Murray and The Centre for Social Cohesion wa intensified after the debate was called off: Al Muhajiroun hijack Sharia Law debate. 

Islamophobia Watch believes it was a fruitless effort and Murray was a fooled. Douglas Murray and Anjem Choudary – two self-publicists help each other out.

We haven't heard from Al-Muhajiroun yet. They didn't come of all that looking too great, but ... was that what kept them away from Luton a couple of days later? Were they licking their wounds?  Were they not wanting to confront the Islamic Centre?  Are they thinking again. I personally doubt it.

The question is how you engage with a group like this? I have ideas. I have some theory. I have a few parallel experiences. Put together give me some hope. More on that another time.

NB:  Of interest is the paper put together by the Luton Islamic Centre, "A critical study of the multiple identities and disguises of al-Muhajiroun."  116  pages long, it is a gives their perespective on the group. More managelable is Al-Muhaajiroon - The Extremist Cult Exposed at 3 pages.

This is the latest in a series of posts focusing on the issues currently being worked out in Luton. For the full list of posts see Seeking Peace in Luton - and Multicultural UK

Obama on Fatherhood

The man walks on water once again; vulnerability, humanity, grace and wisdom.
 
The White House - Press Office - Remarks by the President at Fatherhood Town Hall.

And when fathers are absent -- when they abandon their responsibilities to their children -- we know the damage that that does to our families. Some of you know the statistics: Children who grow up without fathers are more likely to drop out of school and wind up in prison. They’re more likely to have substance abuse problems, run away from home, and become teenage parents themselves.

And I say this as someone who grew up without a father in my own life. I had a heroic mom and wonderful grandparents who helped raise me and my sister, and it's because of them that I'm able to stand here today. But despite all their extraordinary love and attention, that doesn’t mean that I didn’t feel my father's absence. That's something that leaves a hole in a child’s heart that a government can't fill. ...


.... I've made mistakes as a parent, and I'm sure I will make plenty more. There have been days when the demands of work have taken me from my duties as a father and I’ve missed some moments in my daughters’ lives that I’ll never get back. So I’ve been far from perfect.

But in the end, it’s not about being perfect. It’s not always about succeeding; but it’s about always trying. And that's something everybody can do. It’s about showing up and sticking with it; and going back at it when you mess up; and letting your kids know -- not just with words, but with deeds -- that you love them and that you're always -- they're always your first priority.

Fear and hatred on the streets of Luton??

Yet another story -- in the Sunday Times tomorrow on this occasion --  that seeks to understand what is going on here. I guess it sells newspapers and keeps them in business and a lot of people employed, but the article really just tells the story so far with a few new twists. To be honest though, having watched, commented on and analysed what is going on since March 10th it is yet again a sensationalised version of events.

Fear and hatred on the streets of Luton   "When troops returning from Iraq marched through Luton, all hell broke loose. Muslims protested, white residents rioted and the Sikh mayor was viciously attacked. Can this multicultural community ever find peace — or is this eruption of long-simmering tensions a sign of even worse to come?"

Once again I sometimes barely recognise the town where I myself am spending most of my time working to bring peace and understanding around this very issue. These have been troubling times, but the dramatic language belies the reality. I spent most of the day today in Bury Park; so did my wife. We were not always together. I had no worries. The sun was shining, people were happy and happy to talk. 

We were meeting to work on opposing extremism. Muslims, other faith leaders, town councillors, unionists. It wa sgood - more soon. We have met before for other events. Christians and Muslims call for Peace in Luton   Does anything get said about that. No.

But, of course, the rest of the world knew little of the long, slow-simmering tensions in the town and its struggle for harmony — community cohesion, in the jargon of the age — over many years, during which its mix of race and culture has become increasingly diverse. It’s a story of our times — the struggle for all of us, with our varieties of races and religions, to accept our differences and live peacefully together, and the tricky balance of competing freedoms of expression: the freedom to march, the freedom to protest, the right to be free from religious or racial hatred or harassment. “I’m not a racist, but…” one middle- aged white man in Luton told me, “…if they don’t like it here, why don’t they piss off home?”

The article is true at one level, but certainly not the whole truth. Why don't they talk to the people are working their guts out to change all this, and are actually hopeful?  Why does it seem they are they so set to make the problem worse? 

This is the latest in a series of posts focusing on the issues currently being worked out in Luton. For the full list of posts see Seeking Peace in Luton - and Multicultural UK